For your reference, the following site has been completely updated as of May 1, 2008:
1000+ Death Penalty Links
Clark County Prosecuting Attorney
Over 3,000 death penalty links, separated into 38 different categories, including 150+ Pro-Death Penalty Links. Also includes Wrongful Convictions and DNA, Religion, Obama/McCain, Deterrence, History, Methods, and Death Penalty Humor. (Every link updated 05-01-08)
Also: Comprehensive information on the Indiana Death Penalty: Current Death Row, Executions since 1900, Legal and factual summaries of all death penalty cases since 1976, Indiana Death Penalty Statutes and Court Rules.
Also: Detailed listing of all executions in the U.S. since 1976, with method and state of execution, age, murder/sentencing/execution dates, names of victims, news accounts, court opinions.
Clark County, Indiana
In response to your writings about blocking software in public libraries.
This is why I vote down every tax measure to fund libraries I want to send my child to the library to have a safe experience, not to search for Pokemon and get POKE MY MOM on Google. You can tell me to keep my kid home, fine, that¹s exactly what I will do. I¹ll keep my money home too.
Why in God¹s name would you want children exposed to porn?
Alan A. Johnson
I recently read your article on natural rights. I consider myself a utilitarian atheist (and amateur philosopher) and agree with Jeremy Bentham when he says that such rights are "nonsense upon stilts". However, what I have noticed is that people today do not seem to refer to "natural rights". Most people I debate use the phrase "human rights". Does this difference in wording change any of the circumstances? Does using the phrase "human rights" defer any of the arguments used against natural rights? Is there any difference between the two?